Latest Thread Images

20240205_003400.jpg
1698758714937.png
Screenshot 2023-08-25 171401.jpg
SmartSelect_20230809_120302_Chrome.jpg
Screenshot_20230809_120032_Chrome.png
Screenshot_20230809_115815_Chrome.png
Screenshot_20230809_095609_Google Play Store.png Screenshot_20230809_095316_TIDAL.png IMG_5133.jpeg IMG_5131.jpeg IMG_5132.jpeg IMG_1402.jpeg IMG_5082.jpg IMG_5081.jpg IMG_5079.jpg IMG_5080.jpg Screen Shot 2023-04-28 at 7.42.09 pm.png Maximum listening quality.jpg 88946E6A-1F3E-440B-BBEA-11A0655049A2.png ACFBC151-B5DE-45B1-8342-28450D452A77.png
See full thread gallery...
Tidal Lossless Streaming
Nov 11, 2014 at 10:31 PM Post #106 of 5,203
Don't overlook the player attributes in comparisons also -- decisions made in construction of the software. There is more to it than just the files. To me, the Tidal iOS player (only Tidal player I have tried) sounds like it is tuned to be more analytical compared to others -- a little too much for my taste. 
 
Nov 12, 2014 at 12:50 AM Post #107 of 5,203
I'm really excited about Tidal, but it really needs some sort of local import feature like Spotify.  Better yet, the transfer from PC to phone feature that Spotify has.  Switching between Spotify and Tidal feels clunky and definitely not safe while driving...
 
Nov 12, 2014 at 1:18 AM Post #108 of 5,203
TBH I'm VERY close to sticking with Google Play. I keep going back and forth, closing my eyes and listening closely, and while it's undeniable Tidal sounds wonderful, I just cannot hear anything except what may be some INCREDIBLY minute differences in graininess between the two. Google also has local files, significantly better curated playlists (huzzah for Songza!), and a wonderful radio function.
 
I suppose it comes down to need. I "feel better" with Tidal because I know it's lossless, but I haven't a clue if that's actually doing anything for me. 
 
Nov 12, 2014 at 2:59 AM Post #109 of 5,203
iamjohnm said:
One thing I forgot to mention that I noticed earlier, I have my own music on Tidal, I didn't even know my distributor gave it to them but awesome.  But some of the tracks I gave to one my distributors only take 320 MP3 and it was on there.  So it is possible some tracks on there are not lossless.  
Click to expand...


When you play those files in the Tidal client, does the "hifi" logo light up? I'd expect not if they're sourced form anything less than 16/44.
 
Nov 12, 2014 at 5:39 PM Post #111 of 5,203
I would not be at all surprised if they took the files they were given and just sort of "converted" them to the various formats. 
 
Nov 12, 2014 at 9:33 PM Post #118 of 5,203
Is there a way to tell that a flac file is made from 320 source -- when all you have is the 320 source to compare with? File size maybe? I don't understand flac compression enough to know.
 
I was listening to some things in their blues playlists that sounded pretty rough. Would definitely not have included them as putting their best foot forward.
 
Nov 12, 2014 at 9:39 PM Post #119 of 5,203
There is no way to tell from what I understand unless you have a higher quality source which I do have on my own songs, and like I said the distributor I use for some of my songs only take 320 MP3.
 
Nov 13, 2014 at 3:41 AM Post #120 of 5,203
Thanks for the link, I'll have a listen to it in a bit. Frankly, I'm sure in most cases I couldn't tell the sound of a 320kbps file from a lossless one. However, that is of course not the point... Tidal's selling point is 16/44 streaming and we should hold them to that. Is it possible that your distributor could have converted the 320 file/s you gave them to 16/44 in order to get them into Tidal's service? This would be interesting to know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)
Back
Top